BB is way better at drafting than he is at some of these other functions (player retention, marquee free agency).

Player retention and free agency boil down to the same thing with him.

BB has learned to mostly look for hometown discount when choosing to retain a player. He keeps a few guys he believes he can't live without at near full market value. In free agency he grabs a bunch of low cost guys and hopes a couple surprise rather than go out on a limb for big names and big bucks. Less criticism if they fail that way by spreading the resource expenditure out.

I think the quality of a GM is best evaluated by looking at the record of his team. And as such it is hard to argue that BB is a great GM. There is not a team in the history of the cap era that has had a better overall record for a 12 year period than the Pats have had under BB.

And you can look at specific aspects all you want and the same is going to be true. Drafting - we can all select a few years of brillinace from a specific GM, or great 'hits', but if you evaluate that GM on totality of drafting over any prolonged period there will be terrible moments as well. Given the draft capital assigned to NE over the last decade the statistical analyses all put the Pats at the top. Player retention - people point to specific players lost, but never point to all the players retained because BB did not overpay a single player. People look at two SB losses and other post season losses, but the Pats made it to those games EVERY year - while the other brilliant GMs missed playoffs half the time or failed earlier in the post season. And the locker room in NE has remained one of if not the strongest in the NFL - that speaks to getting the right players, treating them well, keeping the salary structure balanced, and cutting losses and malcontents early.

So I am not complaining.

Regular season wins are the measure of what makes a GM great? The Buffalo Bills must have had the greatest GM in history when they lost 4 SBs in a row then.

He's not perfect but you don't even have to leave the city of Boston to see ineptitude among GMs of the other major sports teams.

Can you imagine BB as GM of the Celtics, but having no one else on the roster capable of functioning as a point guard behind RR? I can't. Can you imagine him allowing his roster of key players to age to the degree that they hamstring the franchise for the next several years, possibly as much as a decade? I can't.

Can you imagine BB as GM of the Red Sox, and allowing veterans to treat the clubhouse like Animal House? Or bringing in a "player's coach" (BV) that was like putting out a fire with gasoline? I can't.

Point well taken. But, on the other hand, can you imagine Henry, Lucchino, and Werner giving Belichick the total control that Kraft has relinquished? Or Danny Ainge relinquishing roster control to Belichick?

He's not perfect but you don't even have to leave the city of Boston to see ineptitude among GMs of the other major sports teams.

Can you imagine BB as GM of the Celtics, but having no one else on the roster capable of functioning as a point guard behind RR? I can't. Can you imagine him allowing his roster of key players to age to the degree that they hamstring the franchise for the next several years, possibly as much as a decade? I can't.

Can you imagine BB as GM of the Red Sox, and allowing veterans to treat the clubhouse like Animal House? Or bringing in a "player's coach" (BV) that was like putting out a fire with gasoline? I can't.

Point well taken. But, on the other hand, can you imagine Henry, Lucchino, and Werner giving Belichick the total control that Kraft has relinquished? Or Danny Ainge relinquishing roster control to Belichick?

On your first point, no I can't. That's a good reason why they underachieve relative to their team payroll. They need an overhaul of the front office.

On your 2nd point DA is being exposed. He promised he wouldn't allow the Big 3 to age and remain on the team like the Original Big 3, then did just that. This is the equivalent of still having Bruschi and Willie Mac as starters in 2013. They had the right idea when they hired Pitino as coach and head of basketball operations, just the wrong guy.

You're telling us that teams who don't win the championship for nearly a decade despite having a HOF QB are doing things right?

Yes.

By the way, Bill Polian was the GM of those Bills teams for 3 of their 4 super bowls. He was fired even though his teams made it to the super bowl 3 straight years. Apparantly, the owner felt like you do. Luckily, Kraft feels differently.

It makes me wonder, if great coaches take over terrible franchises and usually require two to three years to turn them around (Jimmy Johnson's first season 1-15, Bill Walsh 2-14, Chuck Noll 1-13) and Bill Belichick's only redeeming quality is that he's a great coach, than I wonder how he has sustained excellence for over a decade with all these horrible players... it just doesn't make sense, how does he keeps winning?

I rarely see teams win a SB when those teams best players choke at the same time.

I rarely see teams win a SB when the D collapses blowing a lead and leaving the offense in desperation mode with less than a minute to play.

No mediocre or subpar QB performance is on the winning side, save for Big Ben in Sb 40 under mysterious officiating circumstances. Or, a miracle helmet catch on a desperation wounded duck heave on a holding play.

It's flat out, unequivocally, that simple. QB league, we have Tom Cool at QB, and he plays worse when it counts as compared to the regular season. Colin Kaepernick just choked it down in the SB. That's on him.

That's not on the 49ers GM or the 49ers D that allowed 31 points, by the way.

And it's not just one game, it's literally MANY games since 2007 in particular.

You can't blame the GM when you're in the SB or in AFC title games evrery year and the QB is the one lacking focus, making bad decisions, or making mistakes that HE makes. Only HE makes them. BB can't be blamed for those plays. Period. It's ludicrous to continue to put that stuff on BB's GM plate, when it makes no sense at all.

No one can help Brady's brain or arm during the game or as the plays unfold.

The fact you continue to start threads, just like RKrap does, to deflect again and again with regards to the elephant in the room (Brady's preference for the shotgun and his performances in that period in the postseason), is annoying for the board. Very annoying.

Get over it. Brady has simply got to be better when it counts. End of story.

We should be celebrating BB pulling the plug on it and hoping Brady improves in 2013 in the postseason, not looking back towards his failures in the recent past.

Brady has about 3 strong looks in 2013, 2014 and 2015, so we'll see how he handles those golden looks in a weaker AFC nowadays, especially on what appears to be absolutely LOADED yong teams here.

I was watching some old All Access clips and it showed Brady in 2011 in Washington when he threw that wounded duck to Underwood in the end zone with O'Brien confronting Brady with the poor throw/decision.

Brady yells "he was open! You want me to throw it away??!"

Yes! Either throw it properly to a wide open WR from 10 yards away or throw if the hell away so we don't lose 3 points and clock! Yes, Tom! What has happened to this guy? Seriously.

There are two problems with this reaction:

1. Brady made a poor throw where Underwood had to slow up, which allowed the DB to undercut the pass. So, yes, if you can't hit Underwood on a line there, throw it away so we can get 3 points.

2. Apparently, he wasn't open, Tom, because it got picked.

Gee, and you wonder why O'Brien is asking what you were thinking there? Don't question Tommy! He's perfect! lol

Tom Brady is never wrong, apparently. Any new receiver whether it be Joey Galloway, Ochocinco, Lloyd, Underwood, etc, it doesn't matter who it is, if you aren't Moss or Welker, two HOF types, the best at what they do, then Brady doesn't really think he's in the wrong with accuracy or decisions because guys like Moss and Welker were so good, they covered up for some of Brady's flaws at QB from 2007 and onward.

Christ, many of Brady's deep balls to Moss in 2007 were underthrown. Moss just stopped and battled through 2 or 3 guys, jumping over them. 2008, he got hurt on a similar throw and just lobbing it up in the air.

You and your little buddies here sitting at those computer with the pink Brady panties on your heads are going to have a LOT of explaining to do if he lays another egg in the postseason.

And, don't think for a second GM BB just didn't slap Brady by basically turning away from Welkie either. He did.

By design.

Every time I see a choice deflectionary comment or thread from you, I will bring up a chokejob situation in recent years by Tom Brady himself.

I refuse to be a hypocrite and unwavering fraud like you and your buddies.

I think the only thing I regret about you being as dumb as you are, is the fact that you're so stupid that you can't even comprehend how much of a fool you make of yourself everyday:)

You are so embarrassing, you make Arizona Cardinal's fans look good.

According to your football logic we should of traded Brady in "weak quaterback class". Then we could of started a guy that according to you "is better than any quartrback in this draft class" for a fraction of the cost. With the salary cap money we would of saved by riding ourselves of Brady we could of went out and signed 100 thirty three year old defensive players. Plus surely we would of received at least two first round picks in return for Brady -we could of selected two more corners with those selections to make up for the 70 we have drafted over the last five years that didn't work out.

Funny that none of this happened. Funny that Belichick obviously doesn't agree with your football opinion...neither does Lombardi (remeber that guy? The guy that was suppossed to fork over his first round selection for Mallett...bawahahaha!).

You really should stick to googling salary cap articles while the rest of us go to work tomorrow, and when that gets boring you can always spell check every post on here.

I think the quality of a GM is best evaluated by looking at the record of his team. And as such it is hard to argue that BB is a great GM. There is not a team in the history of the cap era that has had a better overall record for a 12 year period than the Pats have had under BB.

And you can look at specific aspects all you want and the same is going to be true. Drafting - we can all select a few years of brillinace from a specific GM, or great 'hits', but if you evaluate that GM on totality of drafting over any prolonged period there will be terrible moments as well. Given the draft capital assigned to NE over the last decade the statistical analyses all put the Pats at the top. Player retention - people point to specific players lost, but never point to all the players retained because BB did not overpay a single player. People look at two SB losses and other post season losses, but the Pats made it to those games EVERY year - while the other brilliant GMs missed playoffs half the time or failed earlier in the post season. And the locker room in NE has remained one of if not the strongest in the NFL - that speaks to getting the right players, treating them well, keeping the salary structure balanced, and cutting losses and malcontents early.

So I am not complaining.

Regular season wins are the measure of what makes a GM great? The Buffalo Bills must have had the greatest GM in history when they lost 4 SBs in a row then.

Well - too lazy to check, but I imagine Buffalo had the best regualr season and post season record of any team during those four years. So they lost 4 SBs. How many teams played 19 games every year. The GM put together teams capable of winning.

But I would say a four year window is too short to evaluate a GM on - bad ones, OK, but good to great - need to be consistent for a much longer stretch. Tannenbaum is a good example - two years of decent success, but spending like crazy and it all came crashing down.